From owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Mon Jan 12 15:18:43 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom7 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom7@www2.open-std.org Received: by www2.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 82C56C178DE; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 15:18:43 +0100 (CET) X-Original-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from mk-filter-3-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-filter-3-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.100.54]) by www2.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D42FEC178D9 for ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 15:18:42 +0100 (CET) X-Trace: 125921555/mk-filter-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com/B2C/$b2c-THROTTLED-DYNAMIC/b2c-CUSTOMER-DYNAMIC-IP/88.104.173.37/None/d.muxworthy@bcs.org.uk X-SBRS: None X-RemoteIP: 88.104.173.37 X-IP-MAIL-FROM: d.muxworthy@bcs.org.uk X-MUA: Apple Mail (2.753.1) X-IP-BHB: Once X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ah8BAKvfaklYaK0l/2dsb2JhbAAIx3kIilKEOQiBLg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,253,1231113600"; d="scan'208";a="125921555" Received: from 88-104-173-37.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com (HELO [192.168.1.2]) ([88.104.173.37]) by smtp.tiscali.co.uk with ESMTP; 12 Jan 2009 14:18:39 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753.1) In-Reply-To: <20081202122118.272C4C178E1@www2.open-std.org> References: <20081202122118.272C4C178E1@www2.open-std.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <4A4EA4E2-C4C2-40A6-B612-42EA11405033@bcs.org.uk> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: David Muxworthy Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.3697) WG5 vote 6 on interpretations Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:19:46 +0000 To: sc22wg5@open-std.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753.1) Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk > Please mark the above -Y- in the Yes column for "yes", -C- in the Yes > column for "yes with comment", or -N- in the No column for a "no" > answer {be sure to include your reasons with "no"} and send to > > sc22wg5@open-std.org > > by 8 a.m (UK time) on Monday, 19 January 2008, in order to be counted. Yes No Number Title -C- --- F95/0074 TARGET dummy arguments and POINTER expressions -Y- --- F95/0102 mask-expr evaluated only once -Y- --- F03/0049 Separators in list-directed output involving UDDTIO -C- --- F03/0073 C interop of dummy procedures -C- --- F03/0074 Type mismatch for C character arguments -Y- --- F03/0075 C interop of derived types with array components -Y- --- F03/0076 Scope of Fortran names of procedures with binding labels -Y- --- F03/0077 LBOUND of array structure component -Y- --- F03/0081 F edit descriptor with field width 0 -Y- --- F03/0082 VALUE in place of INTENT for pure procedure dummy arguments -Y- --- F03/0087 Entry names as dummy procedure arguments -Y- --- F03/0098 Does allocate with source= define subcomponents? -Y- --- F03/0099 Clause 16 does not account for volatile variable -C- --- F03/0102 Evaluation of bound-expr in data pointer assignment -Y- --- F03/0109 Referencing deferred binding via absent dummy argument -Y- --- F03/0111 Is defined assignment to a vector subscripted array allowed? -Y- --- F03/0113 Size and uniqueness considerations for ID= -C- --- F03/0114 Inconsistent restrictions on i/o specifiers -Y- --- F03/0117 STOP executed via function in input/output list Comments F95/0074 There is a trivial typo in the answer: 5-0 should be 5-9. F03/0073 If this interp is accepted, consideration should be given to adding this example and answer to annex C.11.2 at [524:43+]. F03/0074 In the new text, '(15.1)' should be '(15.2.2)' for consistency with existing references to 'C character kind'. F03/0102 The recommendation that a new bullet point be added to subclause 16.6.6 to clarify matters has not yet been acted on. F03/0114 To be pedantic, 'EXISTS' in the answer for lines [210:18] and [212:24] should be 'EXIST'. David